"At my age, I have been right enough times to be unafraid to speak up and wrong enough times not to be offended if someone tells me "You are an idiot." Hat tip to Dennis Gorman, Esquire: Raconteur, Renaissance Man, Curmudgeon, and Dear Brother In Christ
Copyright 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015 by Michael R. McCarty

28 June 2015

MR. MCCULLOCH MEET MR. JONES

In the majority
opinion in Obergefell
v. Hodges, 576 US ___ (2015), Justice Kennedy took great pains to try to
differentiate the import of the decision.
He wrote

Finally,
it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious
doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by
divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment
ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as
they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to
their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the
family structure they have long revered. The same is true of those who oppose
same-sex marriage for other reasons. In turn, those who believe allowing same
sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious
conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in
an open and searching debate. The Constitution, however, does not permit the
State to bar same-sex couples from marriage on the same terms as accorded to
couples of the opposite sex.

Id.

Unfortunately,
language such as this in an opinion is known as dicta. Dicta, from the Latin
dictum (“remark”), is the part of a judicial opinion which is merely a
judge's editorializing and does not directly address the specifics of the case
at bar. It is extraneous material which
is merely informative or explanatory and which is not required to reach the
decision. While it may be cited in later legal argument, it does not constitute
precedent (previous court decisions or interpretations) since the comment was
not part of the legal basis for judgment. Opposing counsel’s appropriate argument
is: "Your Honor, that is merely dicta and is not binding on the Court or
the case at bar."

In other words, it is worth less than the paper on which it is written.

And the
attempts to use Obergefell as
weapon have begun. Mark
Oppenheimer, an
admitted supporter of same-sex marriage, has written an interesting and
alarming article for Time. Titled Now’s
the Time To End Tax Exemptions for Religious Institutions, he uses a well-known propagandists’s technique
to advocate for government control of churches and religious matters. He does so by writing

Two weeks ago, with a
decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on the way, Sen. Mike Lee of
Utah introduced the First Amendment Defense Act, which ensures that religious
institutions won’t lose their tax exemptions if they don’t support same-sex
marriage. Liberals tend to think Sen. Lee’s fears are unwarranted, and they can
even point to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion in Friday’s case, which promises “that religious
organizations and persons [will be] given proper protection.” But I don’t think Sen. Lee is crazy. In the 1983 Bob Jones
University case, the court ruled that a school could lose tax-exempt status if its
policies violated “fundamental national public policy.” So far, the Bob Jones
reasoning hasn’t been extended to other kinds of discrimination, but someday it
could be. I’m a gay-rights supporter who was elated by Friday’s Supreme Court decision
— but I honor Sen. Lee’s fears.

The
old “somebody-might-think-about-tossing-that-match-through-that-window-but-I
sure-won’t” ploy.

For
the uninitiated, Bob Jones University is aprivate
non-denominationaluniversity.
Originally founded in 1927 as a part of themodernist-fundamentalist debate that swept through the northern Presbyterian church in the 1920s, it is now located in Greenville, SC. (That debate in which the “modernists”
rejected the divinity of Christ and His virgin birth, the authenticity of His
miracles, the atoning nature of the Cross, the inerrancy of Scripture, and the bodily
resurrection of Christ, divided, among others, the Presbyterian Church in the United
States of America, a predecessor of the current PC(USA). In fact, that continuing debate has led to the
recent continuing massive loss of members by the PC(USA).)

The
University, which was at one time the largest liberal arts university in
Tennessee before it moved to South Carolina, held to a particularly narrow
Biblical interpretation regarding interracial dating,and completely
excluded black applicants until 1971.
Beginning in 1971, the University admitted black students, but only if
they were married. After 1975, the University began to admit unmarried black
applicants, but continued to deny admission to applicants who were married to a
spouse of another race. As far as I can
recall, no one ever asserted that this Biblical interpretation was a sham, i.e., that it was not honestly held.

Nonetheless, the IRS
revoked the University’s tax exempt status because of those beliefs and
policies. In Bob Jones University v. US, 461 U.S. 574 (1983), the Supreme
Court held that the first amendment's free exercise provisionsdid not prohibit the IRSfrom
revoking the tax-exempt status
of a religious university for no other reason than that those practices are
contrary to a compelling government interest, such as eradicating racial discrimination.Same-sex marriageis now a fundamental right under the Constitution. What Mr. Oppenheimer is not (wink, wink)
suggesting is that someone use the Bob Jones precedent to revoke the tax exempt
status of any church or congregation that preaches against same-sex marriage or
refuses to accept and ratify such “marriages” as religiously conforming.

In McCulloch
v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 159, 4 Wheat. 159 (1819), the Court held that a State
could not tax a federal entity, in that case the Bank of the United States. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice John
Marshall said that "[T]he power to tax involves the power to
destroy…" And that, dear friends,
is what the hard-liners in the so-called “gay rights” movement want. They do not seek the long-cherished American “right
to be left alone.” They got that from Obergefell. They want to force any Christian who believes that homosexual
conduct is a sin tosay “Oh, I was wrong. The Bible is
wrong. You are right.” If they don’t get that, then along with Mr.
Oppenheimer, “a gay-rights supporter who was elated by Friday’s Supreme Court decision,”
they will continue to look for any way to destroy Bible-believing Christian
churches. And I do
believe that the attack will be aimed solely at Christian churches. Bible-believing churches think homosexual
conduct is a sin. They, and I include
myself here, also believe that there are plenty of additional sins to go around and we are
all sinners and will be until Judgement Day.
But Islam thinks homosexual conduct is a capital offense. However, I’ve heard no one suggest that an
effort be made to silence the teachers in that faith.

And, I have to say, they
have a logical argument. If same-sex
marriage is a fundamental federal right, then to combat the evil of conscience,
the federal government ought to be allowed to use its taxing power to destroy
any church that does not accept same-sex marriage as legitimate. Remember, Bob Jones University was punished
because it carried its beliefs into action.
Why not, then, destroy a congregation when its session and pastor refuse
to permit a same-sex wedding in its sanctuary?

And, for
liberals, there is another benefit to this ploy. Money!!!!
That is what Mr. Oppenheimer really wants. Like Henry VIII, he wants the “fortunes” that
are currently tax-free in the accounts of churches and other religious and non-profit
entities. Everybody wins—except American
citizens who can no longer rely on the protections afforded by the
Constitution!

About Me

I am, first and foremost, a child of God, saved by His Grace through His Son, Jesus. I am father of 8, including my four little Angels who are waiting with the Master who loves the little children) , and grandfather of the two smartest and most photogenic grandchildren in the world.
And to quote Lee Marvin, "once, by God, I was a Marine."
I am an admirer of all sorts of fire arms. I consider the Second Amendment to be the guarantor of all of our other constitutional rights.
I think there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing the Designated Hitter and the insane practice of awarding World Series home field advantage to the league that won the All-Star Game.
I am kept safe and well-shepherded by Ava T. Dog.